EXPLAIN....we'll have players who can step up if a team tries to take our playmakers out of the game..therefore reggie will have more space/ better matchups so he can do his thing

Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

Well there is not too many 25 year old star FAs out there. We finaly got some guys in here and pretty much all of them will start, we have not even got into the draft yet.
If Kubes drafts well we could be a 10-11 win team next year.

Your right "some" of these guys "probably" will not be here very long, but, they are going to help us out a lot this year.

That's not a bad deal at all, IMO. Those guys could be here longer than just the next 2 years. My point is that the front office has not showed signs of looking to build a team to win in 2010, but rather in 2006.

Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

Bush was never a candidate to be the #2. His value lies in his backfield play as well as his ability to line up in the slot as a 3rd receiver. Getting a capable #2 does not change the lure of Bush nor the rationale for his selection.

Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

still can be used at wr (not to mention we all expected him to be a slot wr), and still your point makes no sense....despite your attempt to be a smug prick

Bush was never a candidate to be the #2. His value lies in his backfield play as well as his ability to line up in the slot as a 3rd receiver. Getting a capable #2 does not change the lure of Bush nor the rationale for his selection.

You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

To be fair, I would say there is a difference when you break the huddle about lining up Bush in motion out of the backfield as a flanker as opposed to lining him up as a #2.

I would much rather have a LB try to matchup with him or S vs. a CB. The value to Bush in my mind is that his dimension creates the odd matchups. I can't see signing a solid #2 as anything except taking more defensive attention away from other weapons... I wouldn't be sacred of Walter beating my deep. Moulds, a little more scary, although not what he used to be.

You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.

Um, I've offered more than that. With respect to "needs", it's not hard to talk yourself out of taking a great player following that logic. Anyways, it's not like Davis hasn't had injury issues nor that Kubiak has not demonstrated that you can use more than one back in his offensive schemes. Why clip your ability to build a potent offense simply to become average at one other spot when you have other methods (other 1st day picks, for example) to address that "need"?

Every player in the draft has a rep based on what they were in college. That's not exactly the best response to those arguments.

Wow this is a busy thread for what is most likely a moot point. An article posted earlier on here didn't even put the Texans in MOulds' top five. I would think with only a couple years left he would want to go somewhere his chances of winning a championship were greater. The Texans are probably a year or two away from getting a guy like that willing to take a chance on us during his last few years.

To be fair, I would say there is a difference when you break the huddle about lining up Bush in motion out of the backfield as a flanker as opposed to lining him up as a #2.

I would much rather have a LB try to matchup with him or S vs. a CB. The value to Bush in my mind is that his dimension creates the odd matchups. I can't see signing a solid #2 as anything except taking more defensive attention away from other weapons... I wouldn't be sacred of Walter beating my deep. Moulds, a little more scary, although not what he used to be.

Exactly. With AJ, Moulds and Putzier you have 3 capable receivers that a defense has to worry about already. Throw Bush in as the wildcard, a guy who's a threat to run or line up in the slot on any down. Then you'll still have Davis, Morency or Cook to line up in the backfield and be a threat to run or go into the flat as a receiver. Teams will have to respect the run and pass on every down. Now why give this up?

Paying for proven talent in the NFL. We have Carr and AJ at high priced contracts base upon their draft staus and performance in college. We do not need a third on offense. If we truly needed a multi dimensional back we should have gone after Edgerrin.